vote on a setting for me please!

[Love in Bloom]

I also think the first one, while still really nice, kind of looks kind of like a class ring to me. The second ring has stronger shoulders that appeal to me from the pics. I totally agree with jcrow though. If you go with the Eli I would definitely have the diamond set as low as possible.

 

[Dee*Jay]

Date: 6/27/2007 10:44:16 AM
Author: parkerj
There are more votes for the eli than the Christopher so far. How do I know what to choose? Maybe one on each hand? (OK, need to put the kids through college). I love them both equally for different reasons. _just like my kids!

Any chance of scholarships?

 

[Love in Bloom]

Haha, good point!

 

[parkerj]

Our son is being recruited right now- but our daughter is all ours!

I asked the jeweler about shipping the ring to out of state to avoid the enormous TN sales tax. He said the law requires that the money be out of state funds as well, which would mean I would have to give the sister in MN the $, she would make the purchase, he would send the ring to her, and she would send it to me.

The other option is to go to Solomon Brothers in Atlanta and get the Christopher designs ring there and avoid the sales tax.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I truly like the ELI ring better. The other looks like they tried to put too many elements in one ring to me. But I''d also recommend looking at www.artofplatinum.com. Leon Mege can do some very elegant work and is probaly in the same price range as Eli.

 

[gladyskristen]

I vote for the first one! Although I personally would have gone with a thinner shank...

 

[jayreneepea]

I like the first one better, but I''d definitely have the diamond set lower.

Are these the only two options??

 

[dimonbob]

I like the ELI ring best and I know that the company does very nice work. They do hand work that many companies cannot or will not do.

 

[snlee]

Another vote for the Eli setting! Can the diamond be set lower?

 

[parkerj]

Yes, the diamond can be tucked in so that there is no space surrounding it. I''ve been to every jewelry store in town and nearly every online store. It seems that these are my two favorites. When I did the math, the christopher piece was 14000 and the Eli piece was 13400 without tax. Each ring having the same stone in the center. When our enormous sales tax is added to the Eli piece because it is in state, it makes it 14706. I could get around the tax by having it sent to a friend out of state, give her the cash, have her pay for it and have it shipped to her, then ship it to me... that''s a lot of trouble, but it''s a 1300 trouble....has anyone done this before?

 

[mela lu]

# one all the way for me

 

[rainydaze]

oooo, i really like the second one. to me it makes the center stand out more to my eye, and although in the closeup there is a lot of elements, in the smaller more life-size shot they all work together seamlessly for strong appeal. plus you said it is more comfortable, a definate plus. you also mentioned the sides aren''t as prominent in person as in the pic, and in the pic they blend well to my eye, so i imagine in person it is even more beautiful. something about it, can''t put my finger on it, it just looks like it would hug the finger just so.......

can''t wait to see what you pick, and the handshots!!

 

[kcoursolle]

the second one is busy, but I like that the halos are more delicate. I like the general design of the first one, but I think the halo is too thick.

 

[jayreneepea]

Date: 6/27/2007 2:42:52 PM
Author: parkerj
Yes, the diamond can be tucked in so that there is no space surrounding it. I''ve been to every jewelry store in town and nearly every online store. It seems that these are my two favorites. When I did the math, the christopher piece was 14000 and the Eli piece was 13400 without tax. Each ring having the same stone in the center. When our enormous sales tax is added to the Eli piece because it is in state, it makes it 14706. I could get around the tax by having it sent to a friend out of state, give her the cash, have her pay for it and have it shipped to her, then ship it to me... that''s a lot of trouble, but it''s a 1300 trouble....has anyone done this before?

Did you say the diamond would be 1.5 and 1.75? The price seems awfully good for that size diamond with a desinger ring. Although I know nothing about the prices of Eli or Christopher, they don''t look cheap. Please make sure your getting an equally beautiful diamond!!

 

[Kaleigh]

I like the second one, but they are both lovely.

 

[FireGoddess]

I prefer #1, the Eli.

 

[parkerj]

The original price for the Eli was 7800 but if I buy my diamond with it at that jeweler, he will discount the setting to 4900 because he''s had it quite a while. I suspect he also bought it before platinum prices skyrocketed. We''re looking at a 1.57 excellent cut round G S12- no flor. He also gives a 20% discount if you pay cash, which lowered the price to 8500. The jeweler did make a good point- you can upgrade your diamond for another occasion,(birthday, anniversary) but you can''t upgrade a setting unless you get a new one altogether....

 

[jayreneepea]

Date: 6/27/2007 3:32:42 PM
Author: parkerj
The original price for the Eli was 7800 but if I buy my diamond with it at that jeweler, he will discount the setting to 4900 because he''s had it quite a while. I suspect he also bought it before platinum prices skyrocketed. We''re looking at a 1.57 excellent cut round G S12- no flor. He also gives a 20% discount if you pay cash, which lowered the price to 8500. The jeweler did make a good point- you can upgrade your diamond for another occasion,(birthday, anniversary) but you can''t upgrade a setting unless you get a new one altogether....

Is it a GIA stone? I''m assuming you''ve seen the stone and are happy with it and it''s eye clean. I''m a huge fan of eyeclean SI''s! Is he offering a lifetime upgrade policy?

He is right that you can upgrade to a better diamond, but you won''t be able to go much bigger with a setting like that.

 

[parkerj]

It''s a GIA cert. the inclusions are around the edges that the prongs will cover anyway. If you can''t see it, it doesn''t exist is my motto. The ring will hold a 2ct if I choose to go that big some day.... for now a little over 1.5 is great. (my first engagement ring was 1/4ct BROWN color 20 years ago!). Actually, either ring will hold up to a 2ct....still floundering.

 

[poshpepper]

Date: 6/27/2007 10:32:44 AM
Author: Love in Bloom

Date: 6/27/2007 10:27:20 AM
Author: parkerj
That''s my cat maddie. She is a little touched in the head.

LOL. The best ones usually are

.

Haa haa, too funny!!!! And I totally agree!


I vote for the first ring... with the diamond set as low as possible

 

[HappyAnniversary]

Ok Poshpepper-Your cat wins!! (in the "touched" department)

And my vote goes to #1 if the diamond can be lower-- the design seems more fluid

BUT you said #2 felt more comfortable and that counts a lot, so #1 better feel good enough that it feels great to be on your hand. And congratulations for 20 years of marriage and the update. I updated mine from a 1/5 carat recently, but not quite in your league.

 

[cutes814]

i like the second one better.

if *i* were getting it done, then i would take out the square side stones and bullets stones and keep the halo with the milgraining and the side with the round stones and milgraining. does that make sense? it''s kinda like taking out the whole middle row of stones on the side and lowering the top row of rounds to meet together with the bottom row.

now that will be a nice ring! am i making sense to anyone??

anyway, i still think the second one is nicer than the first. even if nothing''s changed.

 

[jstarfireb]

I vote for the first one, except that I''d have the diamond set in the same profile as the halo. I think the way the diamond is set so high above the halo exposes it to damage...